Bring Back The Premium Pass - We need guaranteed maps and content

Comments

  • WhiteRabbit_swe
    619 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    The Premium model that we had in the past just doesnt work. Yes it guarantees content but what good is that content when those servers running said content die out too quickly. I've seen it time after time, DLC is released and servers are full for a month or two and then they begin dying out with players returning to the vanilla maps. Secondly it splits the community.

    They have also stated that they are not going back to the Premium model that was used in previous titles.

    -CB
    They just need to make the premium/dlc free after 12 months or something and then its fixed... A community that is split because they refuse to pay for extra content I couldnt care less, its not much money they ask for either, people are cheap... With rented servers dlc content still always was available!
  • Kayback
    367 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member

    Kayback wrote: »
    Instead of demanding being milked for more money how about you just demand they supply good base maps?
    If you paid to see the first Star Wars movie, or the first Godfather movie, or the first Ironman movie, did you consider it being "milked" when you had to pay to see the second? The paid DLC felt like new games, and fifteen bucks was hardly a budget-breaking amount of money. And like it or not, paid DLC worked, it resulted in bigger, better games.


    LOL no that's not it.

    What you are talking about is buying BF1942, BF2, BF2142, BFBC, BFBC2, BF3, BF4, BF1, BFV. Which most of us have done happily.

    Premium is like paying for and watching Starwars A New Hope and then getting told fork out the equivalent of the purchase price or you can't watch the final sceene. Yeah, milking.

    Where do you get $15 from? It was close to $50 for Premium.
  • Kayback
    367 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I don’t wanna hear arguments about splitting the community when every time a game launches millions of players buy the game on a few different platforms. You need 64 in a lobby to play. I like how the free dlc community is so cool with whining for free dlc for a whole group of people who want quality paid dlc.

    I don’t wanna hear vanilla rotation server arguments either, before bf1 dice never made an effort to have all map servers and people got tired of playing servers with 4 maps on them as “official servers” so that point is moot.

    Now we are getting exactly what the free dlc portion of the community wanted, free. Which is 8 maps at launch and then a slow drip of content. Bf1 even added free maps to the rotation on top of the paid stuff.

    I’ll take paid content that is guaranteed any day of the week over a free model that guarantees nothing.

    So you're just going to ignore the arguments you don't like?

    Premium maps split the player base. Yes it was split over platform and over game type preference but it was again split every time there was a DLC with non premium or non DLC purchasers. Saying it isn't so is being disingenuous.

    But again you're making the argument that the lack of premium lead to the lack of content. This is codswallop. *THE FACT THE PREMIUM REVENUE STREAM WAS NOT REPLACED BY ANYTHING* was the culprit for no funds to finance further development.

    The fact they haven't launched their premium currency and micro transactions shop is the problem.

    There are many MANY games out there which finance themselves through premium currency, XP boost and Non Premium currency boosts just fine.

    Until we have actually seen how the microtransactions live service works we can't comment on it being better or worse than Premium.
  • bigiain
    264 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I thought the mixed servers worked quite well in BF1, the DLC maps stayed populated there.

    I suspect though that the real problem with the split for DICE was that not enough people were on the paying side of it.
  • rainkloud
    548 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I think people are naturally blaming the Live Service model for the lack of content and that's unfortunate because it's far from the true badguy. The less convenient but ultimate reality is that there are several factors at fault here.
    • BFV didn't meet sales projections - This was unexpected of course. A ww2 BF should have been a softball but as we now know the pooch was....well you know.
    • Execution was poor - All sorts of issues with company coin leads us to suspect that they weren't ready to go live with Battlefield Currency. No BC means no income flowing in which means fewer resources for maps.
    • Firestorm - With poor sales and no BC income to make up for it a decision was likely made to slow things down until BR was released to see if that could generate some enthusiasm. The problem there is that if BR does well then resources will be given but primarily to Firestorm and if it doesn't do well then there's little reason to keep throwing resources at a dying game. It's a lose lose situation for the core players.

    Out of these 3 Firestorm is likely the biggest offender. It was always going to be a game changer because how gigantic BR is right now. From a business perspective it's perfectly understandable why they'd drip feed the core game and leave their fortunes to Firestorm. It's just so lucrative. They'll keep just enough content coming to prevent an outright revolt but not more than that.

    Look what BR did for BFV in terms of Twitch viewership:

    vn0OuaO.png

    The old DLC models just weren't going to cut it with BFV. When cosmetics are done right they are very lucrative. And if cosmetics had not been all goofy and had been launched on time we would have seen more maps and other content. But none of that matters now because Firestorm was thrown into the mix and it's like a vacuum that sucks all the attention and resources away from core. The core game is just a gateway drug into BR which is their long term profit maker.

    I think the only long term hope for people looking for BF style play is that a competitor emerges that can work with an engine that can do destruction. I fear that is still a ways off. Until then there are dark days ahead for BF I predict.

    Tractors = shame
  • PoppaPappo
    235 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Premium pass didn’t go away because people complained. They couldn’t care less what people complain about. It went away because they’ve been trying to move away from selling individual games to using a subscription service, a la Netflix and the like. It’s been obvious for a long time now.
  • DJTN1
    306 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    PoppaPappo wrote: »
    Premium pass didn’t go away because people complained. They couldn’t care less what people complain about. It went away because they’ve been trying to move away from selling individual games to using a subscription service, a la Netflix and the like. It’s been obvious for a long time now.

    ^--This.

    If they could get away with it they'd charge you $100 for a game with nothing in it but a loading screen and charge you for each new pixel afterwards. They couldn't do dlc because implementing a "live service" requires a lot of resources, especially on the back end. Not only is a new structure required for deployment but UI, game play, scoring, task, rewards and a restructuring of employees to manage the whole thing. It's a lot of work.

    But they see it as being worth it. BFV is just the ground work being layed down for future titles and we're financing it. All of these game developers and publishers are moving to a live service model because they see big money. I see it as a scam. They slowly drip out challenges and content to keep you playing more. It's called "player engagement". They don't care if you're having fun or not, as long as you're "engaging with the service" . They get you hooked on a repetitive loop of maybe this time the reward will be better. Eventually you're spending all your time playing the game like a dang job. That keeps you in game longer and increases the chances of them selling you something. It's the same way socal media works. It's psychological trickery. Unfortunately these game publishers are putting the cart before the horse and they don't have anything rewarding to hook you yet, but they will. You can count on that.

    Non of these game companies are going to give up on the DLC cash cow because poor people are complaining, give me a break. They've moved on to a more lucrative revenue stream.
  • Kayback
    367 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I don’t wanna hear arguments about splitting the community when every time a game launches millions of players buy the game on a few different platforms. You need 64 in a lobby to play. I like how the free dlc community is so cool with whining for free dlc for a whole group of people who want quality paid dlc.

    I don’t wanna hear vanilla rotation server arguments either, before bf1 dice never made an effort to have all map servers and people got tired of playing servers with 4 maps on them as “official servers” so that point is moot.

    Now we are getting exactly what the free dlc portion of the community wanted, free. Which is 8 maps at launch and then a slow drip of content. Bf1 even added free maps to the rotation on top of the paid stuff.

    I’ll take paid content that is guaranteed any day of the week over a free model that guarantees nothing.

    I was certain I replied to this....

    You can't just ignore the arguments you dislike. The player base is split over platform and game type yes, but it was split further by Premium/DLC. Arguing otherwise is disingenuous.

    The problem isn't the presence of Premium or not. It was nothing actually replaced it. You can't close one revenue stream without putting a new one in place if you need more constant revenue.

    That isn't the players fault.
  • azelenkin0306
    553 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Kayback wrote: »
    I don’t wanna hear arguments about splitting the community when every time a game launches millions of players buy the game on a few different platforms. You need 64 in a lobby to play. I like how the free dlc community is so cool with whining for free dlc for a whole group of people who want quality paid dlc.

    I don’t wanna hear vanilla rotation server arguments either, before bf1 dice never made an effort to have all map servers and people got tired of playing servers with 4 maps on them as “official servers” so that point is moot.

    Now we are getting exactly what the free dlc portion of the community wanted, free. Which is 8 maps at launch and then a slow drip of content. Bf1 even added free maps to the rotation on top of the paid stuff.

    I’ll take paid content that is guaranteed any day of the week over a free model that guarantees nothing.

    I was certain I replied to this....

    You can't just ignore the arguments you dislike. The player base is split over platform and game type yes, but it was split further by Premium/DLC. Arguing otherwise is disingenuous.

    The problem isn't the presence of Premium or not. It was nothing actually replaced it. You can't close one revenue stream without putting a new one in place if you need more constant revenue.

    That isn't the players fault.

    What we have right now is the player's fault only. Once they stop buying half-finished games and, what's even worse, defending these bad business practices ( just check the Reddit and see how bad things are ), we'll see some changes.

    Solutions of how to make Premium right have been posted multiple times here, but since Developers don't care we have what we have right now.

    Live Service would have worked if this Battlefield was intended to be supported for more than 2 years. Since they're releasing a new game every 2 years, what's the point?

    According to the roadmap, in the end of 2019 we're still in 1941. I am pretty sure that they're planning new game for 2020, so we have 1 year to cover 4 years of WW2. With current pace (5-6 maps per year), most definitely in Spring 2020 we'll see USSR with 3-4 maps and then maybe 2-3 maps for Western Front in 1944-1945. Done and proceed to the next toy.




  • mattd3162014
    313 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    We are only going to get 4 more maps altogether and the bare minimum of weapons and gadgets mark my words you will be shocked out how little content is left to come!!!And you only have the crybabies who complained about premium pass to blame.
  • azelenkin0306
    553 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    PoppaPappo wrote: »
    Premium pass didn’t go away because people complained. They couldn’t care less what people complain about. It went away because they’ve been trying to move away from selling individual games to using a subscription service, a la Netflix and the like. It’s been obvious for a long time now.

    It's not correct to compare subscription-based services with BFV Live Service. Netflix won't go away and won't be scrapped in 2 years. When new BF is released they will forget about BFV (like they did with BF1 - most successful BF to date) and move resources to a new toy to charge you full price one more time.

    If you just read about this Live Service and make some basic analytics, you will realize that this Live Service is a just lame attempt to hide the fact that BFV was rushed and released too early just to close financial quarter. Game wasn't simply ready to be launched in November.

    I remember when Reddit praised the message from BF developer that they have more than 100 pages of patches and fixes. Really? This is thing you should be ashamed of, not to be proud of.

    I guess in 2020 people will praise Battlefield if it just starts and allows you to connect to the server.

  • azelenkin0306
    553 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    We are only going to get 4 more maps altogether and the bare minimum of weapons and gadgets mark my words you will be shocked out how little content is left to come!!!And you only have the crybabies who complained about premium pass to blame.


    It's in people's nature to blame everything and everyone, except themselves :)
  • Kayback
    367 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member

    What we have right now is the player's fault only. Once they stop buying half-finished games and, what's even worse, defending these bad business practices ( just check the Reddit and see how bad things are ), we'll see some changes.


    This I won't disagree with. I have purchased enough early access Alpha and Beta games to agree with you. No more pre orders, but by that vein no more premium because that's essentially paying developers to finish their games.

    Here is $50 for a half hearted job and here is another $50 to give me the rest.

    And that's what BFV feels like. An early access game.

    A very good early access but an early access still.

    Is it so bad to want a AAA developer to ship a finished product?
  • PoppaPappo
    235 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    PoppaPappo wrote: »
    Premium pass didn’t go away because people complained. They couldn’t care less what people complain about. It went away because they’ve been trying to move away from selling individual games to using a subscription service, a la Netflix and the like. It’s been obvious for a long time now.

    It's not correct to compare subscription-based services with BFV Live Service. Netflix won't go away and won't be scrapped in 2 years. When new BF is released they will forget about BFV (like they did with BF1 - most successful BF to date) and move resources to a new toy to charge you full price one more time.

    If you just read about this Live Service and make some basic analytics, you will realize that this Live Service is a just lame attempt to hide the fact that BFV was rushed and released too early just to close financial quarter. Game wasn't simply ready to be launched in November.

    I remember when Reddit praised the message from BF developer that they have more than 100 pages of patches and fixes. Really? This is thing you should be ashamed of, not to be proud of.

    I guess in 2020 people will praise Battlefield if it just starts and allows you to connect to the server.

    You totally misunderstood what I was saying. In a few years, you will no longer buy individual games. You will not buy Battlefield 7, or Anthem 2, or Far Cry 8, or whatever. You will buy an EA subscription, an Ubisoft subscription, an Activision subscription. You will pay a monthly fee and have access to all the games they add to the service like Netflix or Spotify. Premium doesn’t make any sense with such a model. EA already has their subscription service on PC and XBox and there have been reports that they’re finally working out a deal with Sony. It may not come until the next gen of consoles but it’s coming.
  • trip1ex
    4693 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 2
    Kayback wrote: »

    What we have right now is the player's fault only. Once they stop buying half-finished games and, what's even worse, defending these bad business practices ( just check the Reddit and see how bad things are ), we'll see some changes.


    This I won't disagree with. I have purchased enough early access Alpha and Beta games to agree with you. No more pre orders, but by that vein no more premium because that's essentially paying developers to finish their games.

    Here is $50 for a half hearted job and here is another $50 to give me the rest.

    And that's what BFV feels like. An early access game.

    A very good early access but an early access still.

    Is it so bad to want a AAA developer to ship a finished product?

    That's EA's definition of Live Service. Unfinished product that the customers pays full price for in the hopes that we finish it before the next one comes out. ;)
  • HardAimedKid
    11386 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 2
    Kayback wrote: »
    I don’t wanna hear arguments about splitting the community when every time a game launches millions of players buy the game on a few different platforms. You need 64 in a lobby to play. I like how the free dlc community is so cool with whining for free dlc for a whole group of people who want quality paid dlc.

    I don’t wanna hear vanilla rotation server arguments either, before bf1 dice never made an effort to have all map servers and people got tired of playing servers with 4 maps on them as “official servers” so that point is moot.

    Now we are getting exactly what the free dlc portion of the community wanted, free. Which is 8 maps at launch and then a slow drip of content. Bf1 even added free maps to the rotation on top of the paid stuff.

    I’ll take paid content that is guaranteed any day of the week over a free model that guarantees nothing.

    I was certain I replied to this....

    You can't just ignore the arguments you dislike. The player base is split over platform and game type yes, but it was split further by Premium/DLC. Arguing otherwise is disingenuous.

    The problem isn't the presence of Premium or not. It was nothing actually replaced it. You can't close one revenue stream without putting a new one in place if you need more constant revenue.

    That isn't the players fault.

    You did reply and I said the argument of splitting the player base is moot, I didn’t ignore it.


    I don’t really care how we got to a free dlc model all I know is weighing pros vs cons I’ll take paid dlc where I know what is to come over free models that guarantee nothing. It’s all preference. Neither side (for or against) has anything new to offer up as to why they like what they like better so it’s a waste of time topic as far as I’m concerned.

    Also I don’t like the base game, but I do like the Br. So thank you for the “free” Battle Royale EA.
  • aypee
    137 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    One big reason people aren't mentioning as to why most dlc maps weren't played that much. Lack of playlist to include them. It took them to the end of bf4s games life cycle to add a rotation with mixed maps from dlc. Before that, you could only play an expansion at a time. No mixed dlc playlist. No vanilla plus dlc playlist. This is what hurt the player count the most imo.

    I'm for premium btw. I knew after the star wars **** show the battlefield content would be bare for at least a year. Just too many great games to play to wait for content to finally trickle in to this game
  • Autorotor
    221 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    It's a $100 dollars for 2-3 years of entertainment. If you think that's to expensive you're communist..
  • Catsonspeeed
    612 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Premium was the way to go, no question about that. They could tweak that a little, since there are concerns that it divides the player base. My suggestion is lets bring Premium Pass back, but make the Premium content free for everyone lets say after 6 months. DLC drops, Premium owners get to play it for 6 months, and after that it's free for everyone. 

    That would bring some life back to the DLC maps, and increase the longevity, because lets be honest, usually after that time the DLC maps start to lose players interest. This way everyone would be happy. We would get the good amount of quality content that we want, and the so called divided player base would only be a temporary thing. If this was the model, I wouldn't even hesitate to pay that extra 50€ for Premium Pass.
This discussion has been closed.